인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 노동법이론실무학회 노동법포럼 노동법포럼 제46호
- 발행연도
- 2025.11
- 수록면
- 1 - 33 (33page)
- DOI
- 10.46329/LLF.2025.11.46.1
이용수
초록· 키워드
This study analyzes major comparative law cases to examine the legal justifications and limitations surrounding discussions on extending the mandatory retirement age. In the United States, amendments to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) have, in principle, prohibited mandatory retirement systems. Japan, in parallel with the gradual increase in the pensionable age under the Employees’ Pension Insurance Act, has implemented phased institutional reforms—setting the mandatory retirement age at 60, introducing continued employment up to 65, and imposing a duty on employers to make efforts to secure employment opportunities until 70. Within the European Union, mandatory retirement systems are permitted only when justified by legitimate social policy objectives under the principle prohibiting age discrimination, and this approach has been concretized differently in Germany, France, and the United Kingdom.
Through this comparative legal analysis, the study identifies several key considerations for future discussions on the mandatory retirement age in Korea. First, the mandatory retirement system is not a self-evident institution; it requires social policy justification consistent with, yet in tension with, the principle of age discrimination prohibition. Second, while extending the mandatory retirement age is an inevitable response to the income gap caused by the increase in the National Pension payment age, it must be accompanied by a comprehensive reorganization of the labor law framework, including reforms to corporate personnel and wage systems, a reassessment of dismissal regulations, and stricter controls on fixed-term employment. Third, ensuring the effectiveness of retirement age extension requires not merely legislative reform but also a comprehensive support system to maintain older workers’ skills, safeguard their health, and facilitate job transitions.
Through this comparative legal analysis, the study identifies several key considerations for future discussions on the mandatory retirement age in Korea. First, the mandatory retirement system is not a self-evident institution; it requires social policy justification consistent with, yet in tension with, the principle of age discrimination prohibition. Second, while extending the mandatory retirement age is an inevitable response to the income gap caused by the increase in the National Pension payment age, it must be accompanied by a comprehensive reorganization of the labor law framework, including reforms to corporate personnel and wage systems, a reassessment of dismissal regulations, and stricter controls on fixed-term employment. Third, ensuring the effectiveness of retirement age extension requires not merely legislative reform but also a comprehensive support system to maintain older workers’ skills, safeguard their health, and facilitate job transitions.
#정년제
#정년연장
#연령차별금지
#국민연금 지급연령
#세대갈등
#Mandatory retirement system
#Extension of mandatory retirement age
#Prohibition of age discrimination
#Pensionable age under the National Pension Scheme
#Intergenerational conflict
상세정보 수정요청해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!
목차
- Ⅰ. 들어가며
- Ⅱ. 미국 고용상 연령차별금지법
- Ⅲ. 일본의 정년제도 전개 과정
- Ⅳ. 유럽연합의 연령차별금지 원칙
- Ⅴ. 유럽 개별국가의 정년 제도
- Ⅵ. 맺으며
- 참고문헌
- Abstract
참고문헌
참고문헌 신청최근 본 자료
UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-26-02-094478630
